The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held September 23, 2015 were reviewed and amended. Commissioner Ince made a motionto approve the minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hirst and passed by unanimous vote (7-0).

The minutes of the Planning Commission work session held September 30, 2015 were reviewed and amended. Chair Hirschi made a motionto approve the minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ince and passed by unanimous vote (7-0).

Brandon Toponce, Assistant Planner, reported the property owner desires to construct a self-storage center located in the Industrial-High (I-H) Zone which is allowed with the approval of a conditional use permit (future application). The proposed self-storage facility meets the goals and objectives of the General Plan by having enhanced architectural features, upgraded landscaping, and newly constructed public infrastructure. The proposed self-storage units also meet the development standards and exterior building standards for new construction within the I-H Zone. Full architectural drawings must be submitted as part of the final site plan approval with all applicable detail relating to material and color. The proposed application meets applicable standards for parking. The applicant will be required to complete a landscape plan and screening plan to be submitted for final site plan approval. The applicant will also be required to apply for a separate permit for all signage to be reviewed and approved by staff. In addition, the applicant will be required to work with the City Engineer and Public Works Director regarding a number of issues including entry access relocation; easements and utilities; curb, gutter and sidewalk; power pole clearance; water lines; fire hydrants; and storm drains. Staff believes the applicant has shown how the property may be developed and recommends approval of the conceptual site plan. A final site plan application will need to be submitted to City staff with all necessary conditions being met. Utility Provider Sheets will need to be submitted verifying that applicable utility companies can service this location. Finally, a current title report will need to be submitted and reviewed by City staff.

Steve Garner, representative for applicant, said the applicant is willing to comply with all conditions including the relocation of the entry access.

Chair Hirschi opened the public hearing.

Suzette Sterner said she lives in the Legacy Crossing Apartments. She said there are enough storage units in Centerville already, no more are needed. She said traffic is a nightmare on 1250 West and more storage units is not helpful. She said there needs to be more apartments, condominiums, restaurants and roads. She said more homes will help increase quality of life.

Justin Cozad said he disagrees. He does not want any more apartments, people, or traffic. He wants more storage units. He said all storage units in this area are currently occupied and there needs to be more available.

Seeing no one else wishing to comment; Chair Hirschi closed the public hearing.

Chair Hirschi reminded the Commission of the many discussions regarding redevelopment of the west side to include mixed-use options. Due to public opposition a master planned mixed-use option for this area was never accomplished. Therefore, the base industrial zone uses (i.e., storage units) are permitted. Staff discussed the many traffic studies that have been completed for this area of the city. It was explained that the round-about was the best option for continued traffic flow. The Commission was also reminded that a light at 1250 West and Parrish Lane will be installed in the near future.

Commissioner Merrill made a motion for the Planning Commission to accept the Conceptual Site Plan for the Legacy Crossing Self-Storage Units, to be located at approximately 150 North 1250 West, with the following conditions:

Conditions:
1. A final site plan application shall be submitted following the criteria found in Section 12-21-110(e)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance.
2. A conditional use permit shall be submitted following the criteria found in Section 12-21-100 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. Architectural drawings shall be submitted with the final site plan indicating the exact material and color of the storage units. These plans must be prepared and stamped by a licensed
architect and meet the Architectural Design Standards as found in Chapter 12-35 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. A complete landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and follow the criteria found in Chapter 12-51 of the Zoning Ordinance. This plan shall be submitted with
the final site plan and indicate the following: Type and location of all vegetation, total calculations and percentages of landscaping vegetation, and irrigation plan.
5. Clarification on garbage removal shall be addressed. If the applicant desires to have a dumpster, the location and dumpster enclosure detail shall be submitted and follow the criteria found
in Section 12-51-110 of the Zoning Ordinance.
6. The final plans shall indicate the location and types of all signage.
7. A current title report shall be submitted and reviewed by City staff.
8. All applicable Utility Provider Sheets shall be submitted as part of the final site plan application.
9. The following engineering issues shall be addressed on the final site plan:
o Entry access into the project is too close to the 75 North intersection and shall be moved further to the North to match the drive access across the street, or the entry way must be placed
on 200 North.
o All easements and utilities shall be shown on the final site plan.
o Full curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to 1250 West and 200 North shall be shown on the final plans and how the sidewalk meanders around the existing power poles.
o The power pole on the southwest corner shall have a 25’ to 30’ radius around the pole for possible future development of 75 North.
o Applicant shall verify actual location of existing water lines and all proposed interior fire hydrants. All new water lines shall be looped around the property.
o Applicant shall verify storm drainage on site and how drainage from the east property is being diverted.

Reasons for Action (findings):
1. A complete conceptual site plan application has been submitted [Section 12-21-110(d)(1)].
2. A conceptual site plan is not intended to permit actual development of property, merely to represent how the property may be developed and does not create any vested rights to develop
[Section12-21-110(d)(5)].
3. The use of self-storage is allowed within the I-H Zone [Chapter 12-36].
4. The proposed use meets the applicable goals and objectives for development in the West Centerville Neighborhood, South Industrial District [Section 12-480-6(1.A-1.F)].
5. The proposed buildings appear to meet the architectural design standards for development in the I-H Zone [Section 12-35-080(e),(f)].

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hayman and passed by unanimous roll-call vote (7-0).

CONTINUATION | ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS | SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR (SMSC) OVERLAY ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 12-48 - [Postponed from September 23, 2015 Meeting] - Consider proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments for the South Main Street Corridor (SMSC) Overlay Ordinance (Chapter 12-48); including changes to the City Center District, Traditional District, North and South Gateway Districts, adding a Public Space Plan for Main Street, and other related changes. Centerville City, Applicant.

Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, reported staff has incorporated the perceived changes to the South Main Street Corridor Overlay Ordinance (SMSC) as discussed at the Planning Commission work session held September 30, 2015. Mr. Snyder reviewed the suggested changes. The terms “dwelling” and “units” were combined to read “dwelling units” for language consistency. A “floor area ratio” or FAR was called out for commercial vs. residential development. A graduated density scale was established for the Pages Lane Gateway area. The Public Space Plan was amended to create symmetry on both sides of the street. Building height was adjusted from 25-feet to 30-feet measured from “top back of curb to top of building’s roofline or peak.”

Mr. Snyder explained the FAR calculations and how they would be applied. He said these calculations can be confusing and the Commission still needs to decide on an appropriate ratio value. Staff suggests the ratio value be used in relation to lot size. He reminded the Commission the base Commercial-Medium (C-M) Zone already restricts maximum gross floor area for commercial use at 10,000 square feet. If the Commission chooses to keep the FAR a ratio value of .35 is suggested for the North Gateway, Traditional, and City Center Districts and a ratio value of .45 for the Pages Lane District. Mr. Snyder reminded the Commission that the Pages Lane area is a main priority for both the City Council and the Planning Commission and any decision will likely impact redevelopment feasibility. He cautioned the Commission to carefully consider density and not to cut the density so low as to hinder viability. Staff has amended the SMSC to reduce the density to no more than (8) units per acre as discussed at the work session.

Mr. Snyder said he spoke with UDOT earlier today about the City’s desire to develop a symmetrical Public Space Plan on Main Street with amenities. He said UDOT was not overly encouraging. He said UDOT requires a clear zone which is to remain flat, i.e., concrete or grass. He said UDOT did not call out the width for this clear zone but does not want any upright obstacles, i.e., furniture, lights, benches, etc. within this area. UDOT views these types of amenities as traffic hazards. Mr. Snyder explained UDOT is concerned with traffic flow and traffic safety, not pedestrian safety. Any upright fixture is considered a potential vehicle collision danger. Mr. Snyder said he believes the 4-foot street furniture sector is likely not wide enough to include both UDOT’s “clear zone” and the City’s street furniture desires.

Mr. Snyder explained the SMSC plan has been edited to include the desires for a symmetrical public space layout. However, he expressed concern that this plan may require additional right-of-way from property owners. He said this is problematic because it could be viewed as an “exaction” which could pose some legal issues. He cautioned the Commission to use language that provides compensation for additional right-of-way. Finally, Mr. Snyder explained the building height language was maintained for consistency and said staff suggests the building height be increased from 25-feet to 30-feet on the east side in order to accommodate pitched roofs.

Chair Hirschi made a motion for the Planning Commission to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the following amendments to the South Main Street Corridor Overlay Zone:

I. Definition of “Mixed-Use”

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
• 12-48-030. Definitions. - Certain words and phrases in this Chapter, including uses, are defined in Chapter 12-12 of this Title. The following will be relocated to Chapter 12-12, but are listed below for reference:

Planning Commission Requests (NONE IDENTIFIED)
MIXED-USE, DEVELOPMENT – Mixed-use refers to the combining of commercial uses (office, retail, service or other permitted or conditional commercial uses) with residential uses in the same building or on the same site in one (1) of the following ways:

A. Vertical Mixed-Use. A single structure with the above floors used for residential uses and a portion of the ground floor used for commercial uses.

B. Horizontal Mixed-Use – Attached. A single structure which provides commercial uses in the portion fronting the public or private street with attached residential uses behind.

C. Horizontal Mixed-Use – Detached. Two (2) or more structures on one (1) site which provide commercial uses in the structure(s) fronting the public or private street, and residential uses in separate structure(s) behind or to the side.

Current Commission Recommendations (i.e. June 10, 2015)
“Chair Hirschi made a motion for the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council approval of a residential-medium cap, as follows:

Amend the text of the SMSC Overlay Zone for the City Center and Traditional Main Street Districts to cap the allowable residential density at a maximum of four (4) units per acre as a permitted use and up to eight (8) units per acre as a conditional use.”

Additional Planning Commission Requests (IN BLUE)
(c) Traditional Main Street & City Center Main Street Districts - The following uses, as defined in this Title, shall be the permitted and conditional uses in the South Main Street Commercial District of the SMSC Overlay District Zone:
(1) Permitted Uses:
• Permitted Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone.
• Restaurant, Eatery
• Dwellings, Single Family
• East Side of Street - Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 1-Maximum Allowed 3 dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
• West Side of Street - Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 1-Maximum Allowed 4 dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development

(2) Conditional Uses:
• Conditional Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
• East Side of Street - Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 4-Maximum Allowed 6 dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
• West Side of Street - Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 5-Maximum Allowed 8 dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
• Parking Garage, Public, as part of a mixed-use development
• Restaurant, General, as part of a mixed-use development

(3) Maximum Gross Density:
• Permitted Use Density – Not more than 4 dwelling units per acre
• Conditional Use Density - Not more than 8 dwelling units per acre
• Exception – Any lot, parcel, or tract shall be eligible for at least two (2) dwellings units regardless of size

12-48-080, (a) North Gateway Mixed-Use District – The following uses, as defined in this Title, shall be the permitted and conditional uses in the Gateway District of the SMSC Overlay District Zone:
(1) Permitted Uses:
• Permitted Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
• Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 1-4 units per building Maximum Allowed, 4 dwellings units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
(2) Conditional Uses:
• Conditional Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36- Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
• Dwelling, Townhouse, Two-Family, or Multiple-Family (5-8 units per building Maximum Allowed, 8 dwellings units per building), as part of a mixed-use development;
• Dwelling, Garden Apartments (9-12 units per building), as part of a mixed use development.

(3) Maximum Gross Density:
• Permitted Use Density – Not more than 4 dwellings units per acre
• Conditional Use Density – Not more than 8 dwelling units per acre
• Exception – Any lot, parcel, or tract shall be eligible for at least two (2) dwellings units regardless of size

12-48-080, (e) Pages Lane Mixed-Use District - The following uses, as defined in this Title, shall be the permitted and conditional uses in the Pages Lane Mixed-Use District of the SMSC Overlay District Zone:
(1) Permitted Uses:
• Permitted Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone.
• Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple-Family or Garden Apartments (Density 1-4 units per building Maximum Allowed, 4 dwellings units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
(2) Conditional Uses:
• Conditional Uses, as shown in Chapter 12-36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
• Dwelling, Townhouse, Two-Family, or Multiple (5-8 units per building Maximum Allowed, 8 dwellings units per building), as part of a mixed-use development;
• Dwelling, Multiple-Family, or Garden Apartments (9-12 dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
• Parking Garage, Public, as part of a mixed-use development

(3) Maximum Gross Density:
East Half (200 East to 400 East)
• Permitted Use Density – Not more than 4 dwellings units per acre
• Conditional Use Density, townhouse or two-family – Not more than 8 dwelling units per acre
• Conditional Use Density, multiple-family or garden apartments – Not more than 12 dwelling units per acre
West Half (Main Street to 200 East)
• Permitted Use Density – Not more than 4 dwellings units per acre
• Conditional Use Density, townhouse or two-family – Not more than 8 dwelling units per acre
• Conditional Use Density, multiple-family or garden apartments – Not more than 12 dwelling units per acre
• Exception (both areas) – Any lot, parcel, or tract shall be eligible for at least two (2) dwellings units regardless of size

[new section] 12-48-180 Public Space Plan
The SMSC Overlay Zone is predominately focused and centered on the built and visual environment framing Main Street, between Parrish Lane and Page Lane. Main Street is owned and maintained by the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). However, it is the intention of the SMSC Overlay Zone to contextually influence the physical and visual relationship of private verses public space along the corridor with the Public Space Plan.

A. Public Space Design Sectors
This Sector is important in creating a consistent form and function for the Main Street Corridor. This sector is a supplement to the Pedestrian Path Zone. This sector provides expanded pedestrian pathway along with utility and other streetscape elements. Together, these two sectors are to unite themselves cohesively with the public spaces of the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector.

This sector is primarily focused on creating a contiguous path for pedestrians to travel along the South Main Street Corridor. The pathway divides the Street Furnishings Sector from the Pedestrian Space/ Plaza Sector. However, this sector also serves as the transition from private spaces to public spaces to unite the corridor in both function and form or visual appeal.

This sector is vitally important in creating the desired character or visual appeal of the Main Street Corridor. The Land Use Development Pattern is to include a strong pedestrian-oriented building design, with useable green and/or plaza space around the buildings that create physical interaction or visual places in combination with supportive pedestrian activities.

B. Main Street – East Side. The east side of Main Street is designated as the primary alternative transportation mode for pedestrian movement. The east side contains all three (3) Public Space Design Sectors. The South Main Street Corridor is designated as the historical, cultural, and civic heart of Centerville City. This is a great asset for the City and provides the necessary foundation for the future revitalization of the corridor. In addition to the preservation and/or redevelopment of land uses along the corridor, the redevelopment and revitalization of the streetscape is needed to reflect the desired relationship between public space and private development. The expected design layout for the east side Main Street shall include the following:

1. Priority Street Furnishings Sector Design Elements:
A. Sector Location – The Street Furnishings Sector is to be measured beginning from back of curb to a width or depth of at least four feet (4’). Primarily, the street furnishings sector shall be used for widening the sidewalk system along Main Street to provide greater surface area with a focus towards pedestrian use.
B. Street Furnishings Uses and Materials – This sector is to be developed using a decorative hard surface (i.e. concrete stamp or brick pavers), street furnishings are to consist of street signals and related traffic signage, pedestrian protection bollards, benches, trash cans, bus or transit shelters, public art, etc. All such improvements are to have a compatible or coherent enhanced design appearance along the streetscape.
C. Major Utility Infrastructure. The delivery of utility needed and desired services for the City are a major functional element along Main Street. Above ground utility structures are to be minimized or reduced where possible. Structures shall co-locate with other utilities to reduce need for additional structures and minimize utility pole clutter. Additionally, utility structures shall incorporate joint use of community banners, and other community identity needs.
D. Use of Landscaping. Where utility structures are located, the use of landscaping boxes for the planting of flowers and shrubs shall be installed to provide buffers around the structure and to add visual quality and appeal to the streetscape.

2. Priority Pedestrian Path Sector Design Elements:
A. Sector Location – The Pedestrian Path Sector is to be measured beginning at least four feet (4’) from back of curb and then a width or depth of at least four five to six feet (4’5’-6’) to private property line.
B. Pedestrian Path Uses and Materials – First and foremost, the Pedestrian Path Sector shall be used as the contiguous pathway of the sidewalk system along Main Street and adjoin the Street Furnishings Sector for facilitating pedestrian movement. The pathway shall be constructed with materials, including surface finishes, which meet the City’s and/or State’s adopted specifications for sidewalk construction.

3. Priority Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector Design Elements

A. Sector Location – The Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector is to be measured beginning at least eight 10 feet (8’) back of sidewalk and then a width or depth of at least ten feet (10’) to the Required Build to Line (RBL) of a lot, parcel, or tract.
B. Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector Uses and Materials – The use of and/or materials within the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector shall is to consist of plantings, plazas, benches, bike racks, and other related pedestrian amenities. Additionally, street trees and pedestrian path lighting shall be placed along with the design elements required and/or allowed in Section 12-48-100 and/or as otherwise stated in the regulations of the South Main Street Corridor Overlay Zone.
C. Placement of Street Trees & Pedestrian Lighting. Street trees shall consist of small ornamental or columnar species, so as not to interfere with any overhead utility lines. Additionally, the trees shall be regularly spaced along the streetscape, except where plazas or other public space is provided as authorized on a final site plan approval. Street lighting shall be located and regularly spaced no greater than 80 feet apart along the streetscape, and/or as authorized on a final site plan approval. Lighting fixture illumination shall be of sufficient coverage to light the pedestrian pathway. Lighting fixtures shall be alternately located and/or offset from the tree spacing to prevent unnecessary conflicts between these two design elements.
C. Main Street – West Side. The west side of Main Street is designated as a secondary or supplemental alternative transportation mode for pedestrian movement. The west side contains only two (2) sectors, which are the Pedestrian Path and the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sectors. The expected design layout for the west side shall include the following:

1. Priority Pedestrian Path Sector Design Elements:
C. Sector Location – The Pedestrian Path Sector is to be measured beginning from back of curb and then a width or depth at least five feet (5’) to private property line.
D. Pedestrian Path Uses and Materials – The Pedestrian Path Sector shall be used as the contiguous pathway of the sidewalk system along Main Street. The pathway shall be constructed with materials, including surface finishes, which meet the City’s and/or State’s adopted specifications for sidewalk construction.

2. Priority Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector Design Elements
A. Sector Location – The Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector is to be measured beginning of at least five feet (5’) from back of curb and/or back of sidewalk and then a width or depth of at least 10 feet (10’) to the Required Build to Line (RBL) of a lot, parcel, or tract.
B. Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector Uses and Materials – The use of and/or materials within the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector shall consist of street trees and pedestrian path lighting along with the design elements required and/or allowed in Section 12-48-100 and/or as otherwise stated in the regulations of the South Main Street Corridor Overlay Zone.
C. Placement of Street Trees & Pedestrian Lighting. Street trees shall consist of species compatible with those trees used for the east side. However, the minimal use of utility structures along this side of Main Street allows for more tree species options to be considered during a final site plan approval. Additionally, the trees shall be regularly spaced along the streetscape, except where plazas or other public space is provided as authorized on a final site plan approval. Street lighting shall be located and regularly spaced no greater than 80 feet apart along the streetscape, and/or as authorized on a final site plan approval. Lighting fixture illumination shall be of sufficient coverage to light the pedestrian pathway. Lighting fixtures shall be alternately located and/or offset from the tree spacing to prevent unnecessary conflicts between these two design elements.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
• 12-48-150 (c)(1), Height
• 12-48-150 (c), Lot Type Illustrations, and
• Table 12-48-4, Lot Size and Dimension Requirements
• FYI – The 2010 SMSC Overlay Amendments, for the City Center and Traditional Main Street Districts, created a differentiation between east and west sides of Main Street. East side heights were all reduced from 35 feet to 25 feet. West side remained at 35 feet.

Planning Commission Requests (NONE IDENTIFIED)

• Amend the east side and change the height from 25 feet to 30 feet.

Reasons for Action (findings):
a. The Planning Commission finds that the SMSC Plan does allow for residential uses to be considered in these particular commercial areas for the purposes of facilitating redevelopment and providing potential future synergy to support the desired locally owned land uses of Main Street.
b. The Planning Commission finds that both the Moderate Income Housing and SMSC Plans desire that such residential uses be encouraged through mixed-use development and/or through use of medium and high densities.
c. The Planning Commission finds that the use of medium to high residential densities, within two commercial intensity types, as part of a mixed-use development would facilitate the redevelopment desires of the SMSC Plan.
d. The Planning Commission finds that amendments provide a definable maximum unit allowances and density caps that are not currently in the related ordinances of these districts.
e. The Planning Commission finds that a maximum unit allowances and density caps helps to bring greater clarity to SMSC Plan for the developers, City staff, elected officials, and for the property owners and residents of the immediate area.
f. The Planning Commission finds the maximum unit allowances and density caps, along with associated land development patterns (i.e. setbacks, heights, streetscape standards, etc.) help to bring greater clarity to SMSC Plan for the developers, City staff, elected officials, and for the property owners and residents of the immediate area.

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kjar.

Commissioner Ince said he would like to strike mixed-use from the ordinance all together. He said mixed-use has been an option available for some time now and no redevelopment has happened. He said mixed-use is not a feasible concept for Centerville. He said he has spoken with several Main Street property owners who agree that mixed-use is not the best option for Centerville, nor viable. He would prefer commercial and residential uses only and separately on Main Street. He said there are no business owners that want to live above their business. He said this is a concept better suited to Salt Lake City, not Centerville. He also expressed concern over the high density cap and his desire to lower the densities across the board.

Several commission members disagreed. The current ordinance already allows commercial only and single-family residential. It also provides for multi-family a mixed-use. This provides all options for redevelopment in some way if the mixed-use option is maintained. Commission members expressed concern with a commercial only district and with a residential only district. Staff said there would be little reason to keep the overlay zone and form base concepts if mixed-use were eliminated. Chair Hirschi said Centerville is growing and needs options to accommodate that growth. He said redevelopment will take time and mixed-use will encourage both commercial and residential uses.
The Commission discussed ratio values for the FAR. Chair Hirschi asked if the FAR will have an impact on the number of dwelling units per acre. He questioned if the FAR is maximizing commercial and putting residential at a disadvantage. Commissioner Kjar said he is concerned that without the FAR a development could come in with an extremely limited commercial use and maximum residential, which is also problematic.

Mr. Snyder said design will play a major roll on dwelling units per acre. It depends on attached vs. detached residential. It depends on parking configurations. It depends on market need. He said the FAR dictates minimum commercial requirements. Mr. Snyder explained the FAR is a value judgement with arguments on both sides. He said as a planner he does not agree with FAR as it focuses on the interior of a building. He said the form base code focuses more on the exterior of a building and its relation to parking, pedestrian interaction, and street presence. He cautioned the Commission to allow the market to serve the community by providing developments that will enhance a community and fulfill their needs. It is often difficult for the market to provide adequate service to a community when there are too many stipulations. He said, for example, if multi-family is the need of a community and the requirement is significant commercial, then the residential will be sacrificed to a lesser product. He said the developers are often viewed as the enemy, but it is the developers that provide the necessary infrastructure for a community to survive. He said if the Commission is comfortable with the density cap then perhaps the commercial FAR requirement could be minimized or eliminated and flexibility provided.

Commissioner Johnson made a motion to amend to strike the “floor area ratio” from Section II(c)(4), Section III(a)(4), and Section III(e)(4). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kjar and passed with a roll-call vote (6-1). Commissioner Kjar opposed.

Commissioner Ince made a motion to amend the densities in Section II. He recommended the permitted use density on the east side be raised from 3 to 4 [Section II(c)(1)]. He recommended the conditional use density on the west side be reduced to 6 [Section II(c)(2)]. He recommended the maximum gross density, conditional use, be reduced to 6 [Section II(c)(3)]. He recommended the maximum gross density, exception, be reduced to 1 [Section II(c)(3)]. The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

Commissioner Johnson made a motion to amend to increase the density for permitted use on the east side from 3 to 4 [Section II(c)(1)]. The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

Commissioner Hayman said she is comfortable allowing standalone multi-family residential with appropriate density caps. She would prefer the density caps be lowered. She is concerned with the possible number of buildings on a property with the mixed-use concept. She said it is interesting that the mixed-use concept continues when it seems the current market wants residential.

Mr. Snyder said the danger of allowing standalone multi-family is that mixed-use will likely be skipped all together and commercial will become obsolete. He said Main Street is a commercial based zone, not residential, which would be a conflict with the General Plan.

Commissioner Hayman made a motion to amend Section II(c) to add a permitted use of multi-family housing without the required mixed-use component with appropriate density caps, to be discussed. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson.

Commissioner Kjar said commercial needs to be maintained on Main Street. Chair Hirschi agreed this option would turn Main Street into residential only, which he believes is unhealthy for the city.

Chair Hirschi called for a vote on Commissioner Hayman’s motion to amend. The motion to amend failed with a roll-call vote (2-5). Chair Hirschi and Commissioners Merrill, Kjar, Hirst, and Ince opposed.

Commissioner Hayman made a motion to amend the densities in Section II. She recommended the permitted use density on the east side be reduced to 2 and the west side be reduced to 3 [Section II(c)(1)]. She recommended the conditional use density on the east side be reduced to 3 and the west side be reduced to 4 [Section II(c)(2)]. She recommended the maximum gross density, conditional use, be split allowing 6 dwelling units per acre on the east side and 8 dwelling units per acre on the west side [Section II(c)(3)]. The motion died for lack of a second.

Commissioner Ince made a motion to amend the densities in Section II as stated by Commissioner Hayman’s previous motion with the exception that the maximum gross density, conditional use, be set at 6 dwelling units per acre for both the east and west sides, and the exception be reduced to 1 side [Section II(c)(3)]. The motion to amend was seconded by Commissioner Hayman and failed with a roll-call vote (2-5). Chair Hirschi and Commissioners Merrill, Kjar, Hirst, and Johnson opposed.

Commissioner Ince made a motion to amend to the densities in Section III, North Gateway. He recommended the conditional use density be reduced to 6 [Section III(a)(2)]. He recommended the maximum gross density, conditional use, be reduced to 6 [Section III(a)(3)]. He recommended the maximum gross density, exception, be reduced to 1 [Section III(a)(3)]. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hayman and failed with a roll-call vote (1-6). Chair Hirschi and Commissioner Hayman, Merrill, Kjar, Hirst, and Johnson opposed.

The Commission discussed the Pages Lane area. Chair Hirschi said he likes the graduated density for this area. He agrees with the many public comments that have expressed concern over mixed-use being too dense for the east half of Pages Lane. Commissioner Hirst agreed and suggested that perhaps the east half of Pages Lane should have an option for multi-family only without the mixed-use component. She does not see this area redeveloping into mixed-use anytime soon and believes multi-family would make a better transition with current conditions.

Commissioner Hirst made a motion to amend Section III, Pages Lane Mixed-Use District to add an additional permitted use and conditional use option for multi-family townhouse and two-family without the mixed-use component on the east half of Pages Lane with the densities as listed. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson.

Commissioner Hayman said Pages Lane has a potential to become a large commercial area given the significant amount of land available.

Chair Hirschi called for a vote on Commissioner Hirst’s motion to amend. The motion to amend failed with a roll-call vote (2-5). Chair Hirschi and Commisioners Ince, Kjar, Hayman, and Merrill opposed.

Commissioner Hayman made a motion to amend to reduce the Garden Apartment dwellings per building from 12 to 8 in all sections. The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

The Commission discussed the Public Space Plan. Chair Hirschi said he is in favor of keeping symmetry. He said he understands there are issues with right-of-way, easements, and UDOT but believes it is important for the City to definitively state their true desires for Main Street. Commissioner Hirst agreed. She said Main Street is in need of an upgrade. She said the City has a vision and it includes symmetry, street furniture, and pedestrian pathway and plaza. She agreed the City needs to be clear on their expectations. She agrees it may be difficult to work with UDOT but believes the City will get a better active transportation corridor in the future if their expectations are clearly stated. Commissioner Kjar agreed the symmetrical Main Street corridor is the best plan.

Commissioner Johnson made a motion to amend to revert back to the original, unsymmetrical Public Space Plan. The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

Chair Hirschi said he does not want to see the street lamps lost in the trees as he has observed in other cities. He said they street lamps will add a decorative element to the corridor. He suggested moving the street lamps into the furniture sector where they can be viewed without obstruction.

Commissioner Hirst said moving the street lamps may be problematic and suggested additional research be done on this idea.

Chair Hirschi made a motion to amend to move the placement of the street lamps from the plaza sector to the furnishing sector. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hayman and passed by roll-call vote (5-2). Commissioners Hirst and Johnson opposed.

The Commission discussed building height. Commissioner Kjar said commercial uses need flexibility to provide a pitched roof. He suggested the building height be increased to remain consistent with existing buildings on Main Street which are already 35 feet high. Commissioner Merrill agreed a 35-foot building height should be allowed as that is the current standard for all residential uses throughout the city. Commissioner Johnson agreed consistency and flexibility for redevelopment are important.

Commissioner Johnson made a motion to amend to increase the allowable building height up to 35 feet for both the east and west sides of Main Street. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kjar.

Commissioner Hayman said she is in favor of 30 feet as recommended but is not willing to increase that limit due to public concern. She also said the east and west sides are dealt with separately throughout the SMSC and she does not believe the building height needs to be consistent.

Chair Hirschi called for a vote on Commissioner Johnson’s motion to amend. The motion to amend failed with a roll-call vote (3-4). Commissioners Kjar, Hayman, Hirst, Ince opposed.

Commissioner Hayman said she agrees with parts of this SMSC plan and disagrees with other parts. She believes a master plan is important but feels the densities are too high. Commissioner Ince agreed. He said he strongly believes the density caps need to be reduced.

Chair Hirschi called for a final vote on the original motion as amended (eliminated “floor area ratio” and change the street lamps location). The original motion as amended passed with a roll-call vote (4-3). Commissioners Hayman, Ince, and Johnson opposed.